-1. It is better to clearly state the major contributions of this paper in the introduction.
-2. Given that the focus of the paper is to provide a better solution on a well known problem with several well studied approaches. It is essential for the author to provide extensive comparison studies with those approaches. In Section 4 the paper provides some experiments with very limited scope (solving one simple problem and comparing with one well known problems). This seems not enough. Another way is to provide a qualitative comparison against other proposed approaches and explain why the proposed approach is better. But this is also not found.
-3. It is better if the paper can provide a quantitative study on the speed-up achieved by the proposed algorithm so that the reader can get insights on how much is the performance improvement in theory.
-4. In Section 3. it is better if the paper can explain the intuition of multi-splitting. Currently it is more like "Here is what I did" presentation but "why do we do this" is left for the reader to guess.
+,----
+|1. It is better to clearly state the major contributions of this paper in the introduction.
+`---
+In this work we develop a new parallel two-stage algorithm for large-scale clusters. Our objective is to mix between Krylov based iterative methods and the multisplitting method to improve the scalability. In fact Krylov subspace methods are well-known for their good convergence compared to others iterative methods. So our main contribution is to use the multisplitting method which splits the problem to solve into different sub-problems in order to reduce the communications and to implement both inner and outer iterations as Krylov subspace iterations improving the convergence of the multisplitting method.
+
+
+
+,----
+|2. Given that the focus of the paper is to provide a better solution on a well known problem with several well studied approaches. It is essential for the
+|author to provide extensive comparison studies with those approaches. In Section 4 the paper provides some experiments with very limited scope (solving
+|one simple problem and comparing with one well known problems). This seems not enough. Another way is to provide a qualitative comparison against other
+|proposed approaches and explain why the proposed approach is better. But this is also not found.
+`----
+
+,----
+|3. It is better if the paper can provide a quantitative study on the speed-up achieved by the proposed algorithm so that the reader can get insights on how |much is the performance improvement in theory.
+`----
+
+,----
+|4. In Section 3. it is better if the paper can explain the intuition of multi-splitting. Currently it is more like "Here is what I did" presentation but |"why do we do this" is left for the reader to guess.
+`----
